Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 59 of 59
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by notaphonegeek View Post


    LOL "Bush is a big fat oil Cracker!" "Ungawa Black Power" Classic!!

    "We're gonna put on our war armor and fight for the New Black Panther Party"

    Anyone remember this???? No, there is never any left wing violence......



    If you notice, this is a pro left video. Lets compare this video to the Tea party protesters.

    Who do you think is more violent????

    By the way, I was at the inaguration and was witness to alot of this, I was amazed at the blind support for mumia abu jamal, a notorious cop killer.
    It's like you're just putting your fingers in your ears and going ++ "I can't hear you..."

  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    And I notice he didn't take a moment to apologize for unintentionally spitting on another human.

    I agree with you there, even if it was an accident he should've apologized. Those darn tea party posters! Not only are they violent, they are rude and unapologetic!
    Phones in Family pre> pre> pre> Centro> Rant
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    It's like you're just putting your fingers in your ears and going ++ "I can't hear you..."

    Not at all, just showing you the hypocrisy. Did you even watch the vid?? It's pro left. You should love it.
    Phones in Family pre> pre> pre> Centro> Rant
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by notaphonegeek View Post
    Anyone remember this???? No, there is never any left wing violence.....
    Nobody has said that there's never been left-wing violence. The point is that the current violence is overwhelmingly right-wing.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    All of you claiming that this is not a problem of the right alone, at least one Pulitzer winning journalist disagrees.



    Guess what? I agree with him.

    washingtonpost.com
    Here's a quote from the article that he agrees with.

    It is disingenuous for mainstream purveyors of incendiary far-right rhetoric to dismiss groups such as the Hutaree by saying that there are "crazies on both sides." This simply is not true.

    Uhhh Hellooooo!!! I do agree that right now there is more coming from the right than the left, my point was to show the hypocrisy.
    Phones in Family pre> pre> pre> Centro> Rant
  6.    #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by notaphonegeek View Post

    Uhhh Hellooooo!!! I do agree that right now there is more coming from the right than the left, my point was to show the hypocrisy.
    I think we're getting somewhere. Finally. What he said was correct for right now. Thanks for agreeing. It just took three pages.
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    I think we're getting somewhere. Finally. What he said was correct for right now. Thanks for agreeing. It just took three pages.
    LOL, or to use your term GMFB, how am I agreeing with you? I have said all along that there are wackos on both sides???? I merely have said that it's the Tea Partiers that were "IN STYLE" right now. I gave examples and you said that Jim Jones was 70's, so I gave further examples the NBPP, La Raza etc.. You said you agreed with the article, which one is it? Are there wackos on both sides or not???? It sounds more like you've come around to my way of thinking.


    Last edited by notaphonegeek; 04/02/2010 at 04:48 PM.
    Phones in Family pre> pre> pre> Centro> Rant
  8. #48  
    " Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    All of you claiming that this is not a problem of the right alone, at least one Pulitzer winning journalist disagrees.

    Guess what? I agree with him. "

    FTA: "For decades now, the most serious threat of domestic terrorism has come from the growing ranks of paranoid, anti-government hate groups that draw their inspiration, vocabulary and anger from the far right."
    I am not certain that statement is true. NOTsees (na zi is ****) are socialists, from what I understand (correct me if I am wrong). Anarchism also seems like something that doesn't fit into far-right rhetoric. Tea Baggers are neo-cons in libertarian dresses (that's our right wing). Jihad Jane is a muslim extremist (that's not right wing, fwiw).
    I'm not defending the right wing, I'm just saying that the opinion is bunk. The majority of crazy people (Branch Davidians were the crazy of biblical proportions) have nothing, NOTHING to do with the GOP. Sorry.
    I could perhaps agree with the statement that the majority of hate groups draw their inspiration/vocab from religious fundamentalism.
    Last edited by konsole; 04/02/2010 at 05:07 PM.
  9. rayhollister
    rayhollister's Avatar
    #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by kill_Dano View Post
    Yeah this is awesome! I hope this spreads and more people decide armed violent revolt is the answer for this country. Instead of asking chicks out to coffee I'll Invite them to make Molotov cocktails with me.
    That is why I'm a gun-toting liberal! Because of all the crazy gun toting conservatives!

    By the way, IMHO, Fox News is going to destroy our country. When people start thinking that behaivor like Boehner's "Hell No You Can't" is appropriate for our leaders, the whole kit and kaboodle is going to Hell. We are going to look like the Middle East in no time.

    By the way, for my Christian friends, have you ever noticed that the US is not even mentioned in the book of Revelations at all? I'm just saying.
  10.    #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by konsole View Post
    " Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    All of you claiming that this is not a problem of the right alone, at least one Pulitzer winning journalist disagrees.

    Guess what? I agree with him. "

    FTA: "For decades now, the most serious threat of domestic terrorism has come from the growing ranks of paranoid, anti-government hate groups that draw their inspiration, vocabulary and anger from the far right."
    I am not certain that statement is true. NOTsees (na zi is ****) are socialists, from what I understand (correct me if I am wrong). Anarchism also seems like something that doesn't fit into far-right rhetoric. Tea Baggers are neo-cons in libertarian dresses (that's our right wing). Jihad Jane is a muslim extremist (that's not right wing, fwiw).
    I'm not defending the right wing, I'm just saying that the opinion is bunk. The majority of crazy people (Branch Davidians were the crazy of biblical proportions) have nothing, NOTHING to do with the GOP. Sorry.
    So based on his underlined comment, you feel the most serious threat of domestic terrorism is....from where? The Third Reich? Homegrown Muslim extremists? Individual insane people with no political bent? Sorry, but I think his statement is exactly correct. He didn't state that was the only threat, but the most serious one. If he's wrong, please tell us where the most serious threat is coming from?
  11.    #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by notaphonegeek View Post
    LOL, or to use your term GMFB, how am I agreeing with you? I have said all along that there are wackos on both sides???? I merely have said that it's the Tea Partiers that were "IN STYLE" right now. I gave examples and you said that Jim Jones was 70's, so I gave further examples the NBPP, La Raza etc.. You said you agreed with the article, which one is it? Are there wackos on both sides or not???? It sounds more like you've come around to my way of thinking.

    Oh, I never denied there are wackos on both sides, right now. That is not what Robinson stated. He was pretty clear. The greatest threat right now, and for the last decade, was from the right. Frankly, your examples of left wing extremists are pretty ridiculous. Cindy Sheehan? I'm surprised you didn't trot out PETA with their red paint. Not quite the same as militias planning assassinating the police....is it?
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    So based on his underlined comment, you feel the most serious threat of domestic terrorism is....from where? The Third Reich? Homegrown Muslim extremists? Individual insane people with no political bent? Sorry, but I think his statement is exactly correct. He didn't state that was the only threat, but the most serious one. If he's wrong, please tell us where the most serious threat is coming from?
    You must have posted at the same time I published an edit. My answer was "religious fundamentalism."
    It's why I always viewed Bush and the neo-cons as dangerous. They ignored our founding-fathers understanding of separation of church and state. I really feel that is why we went to war with Iraq, an action I never approved of. I think that's why tea baggers are hilarious in the worst way (I paraphrase) "We are fighting for our privacy unless you have to abort... we want states rights except federal for that one."
  13.    #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by konsole View Post
    You must have posted at the same time I published an edit. My answer was "religious fundamentalism."
    It's why I always viewed Bush and the neo-cons as dangerous. They ignored our founding-fathers understanding of separation of church and state. I really feel that is why we went to war with Iraq, an action I never approved of. I think that's why tea baggers are hilarious in the worst way (I paraphrase) "We are fighting for our privacy unless you have to abort... we want states rights except federal for that one."
    Well....that would be very hard to argue with. But saying that religious fundamentalists have nothing to do with the republican party...that I'm not so sure about....although I did think it was interesting that Ralph Reed yesterday suggested no religious right donors give money to the republican party under Michael Steele's leadership.

    I would wonder what Eric Rudolph thinks of teapartiers? Or the trio that murdered the abortion docs? I would certainly consider them to be religious fundamentalists. You could certainly make a good argument, but I would still consider them on the right.
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Well....that would be very hard to argue with. But saying that religious fundamentalists have nothing to do with the republican party...that I'm not so sure about....although I did think it was interesting that Ralph Reed yesterday suggested no religious right donors give money to the republican party under Michael Steele's leadership.

    I would wonder what Eric Rudolph thinks of teapartiers? Or the trio that murdered the abortion docs? I would certainly consider them to be religious fundamentalists. You could certainly make a good argument, but I would still consider them on the right.
    I assume the GOP loves the Tea Party. That is a voter base that they already have in the bag. teabaggers are GOP extremists.
    That said, it doesn't spare the article you quoted as factual. Extremism over DECADES, as the author proposes, doesn't necessarily come from the Unabomber, the KKK, or the Black Libertation Army. They are terrorist forces generally rooted in religious extremism. They are all guilty of aggression against the innocent in all cases. I just cannot agree that you can paint the right-wing as fostering domestic terrorism - it largely depends on the current political climate The opinion of the article is wrong because it mislabels fundies as being strictly right-wing.
    At the end of the day though, everyone has to be as equally aware of extremism as they do of complacency.
    edit: I really don't care. I generally dislike republicans because the ones I have met tend to be horrible excuses for humans that are against about everything I stand for. They do just want the best for themselves at the expense of everyone else, in general. You win. I don't pre-judge, though.
    * I personally matched McCain in this voting district, and beat him out by 2:1 with the vote of my Republican roomie... McCain got 1 vote here!!! hahah...*
    Last edited by konsole; 04/02/2010 at 06:16 PM.
  15. #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    So based on his underlined comment, you feel the most serious threat of domestic terrorism is....from where? The Third Reich? Homegrown Muslim extremists? Individual insane people with no political bent? Sorry, but I think his statement is exactly correct. He didn't state that was the only threat, but the most serious one. If he's wrong, please tell us where the most serious threat is coming from?
    What are you using to measure how serious the threat is? If you are using 'killed and injured', then I'd say homegrown muslim extremists with a body count of at least 14 for 2009. Although, from this list, it looks like the animal rights/environmental extremists are also up there with the anti govt nutjobs for #2 in attacks.

    Terrorism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    To my knowledge the tea party people aren't anywhere close, but the press likes to harp on them. While it's not considered 'domestic terrorism', I would say the cross border drug warfare and the violent gangs involved in the drug trade are more of a threat to the ave person than any group mentioned in this thread.
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Well....that would be very hard to argue with. But saying that religious fundamentalists have nothing to do with the republican party...that I'm not so sure about....although I did think it was interesting that Ralph Reed yesterday suggested no religious right donors give money to the republican party under Michael Steele's leadership.

    I would wonder what Eric Rudolph thinks of teapartiers? Or the trio that murdered the abortion docs? I would certainly consider them to be religious fundamentalists. You could certainly make a good argument, but I would still consider them on the right.
    So based on what your saying, "religious extremism" is exclusive to the right? That's a question, not a statement BTW. If yes, that would be the equivilent of saying that MS13, Crips and Bloods are members of the left correct? After all they are minorities and they vote almost exclusively Democrat correct.

    Yes, that's an absurd statement I just made. You see, I don't see things as only black and white. This is the problem that you have when you lump everyone into one group. I have yet to see a Neo **** Tea Partier. Does that mean there are none? No of course not. By the way, the neo ****'s are National Socialists which is not on the right of the spectrum. They are (of course) racist scum. But to group everyone together is completely wrong and disingenuous. I never called MS13 leftist did I? Code Pink, Black Panther Party, yes. Did I lump them in together? No.

    By the way, I am not a part of the tea party movement. The neocons and faux news have run away with it. The only good thing is, that some (not all) have awakened to see that what we were taught to believe about our 2 party system doesn't work for the people.

    Faux News, CNN, MSNBC all have agendas. Thank goodness for the internet, though that will be controlled soon.
    Phones in Family pre> pre> pre> Centro> Rant
  17. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #57  
    Guardians of the Free Republics' letters to governors spur inquiry - latimes.com

    Homeland Security Department and FBI officials said Friday that there didn't appear to be an immediate threat, and they were investigating whether the message could be considered dangerous.

    The Guardians of the Free Republics describes its plan as a nonviolent and legal attempt to "restore the true Republic."

    ...


    "Everything is going to be orderly and no one is going to be harmed in this movement," said Billy Ray Hall, who identified himself in a telephone interview Friday as a follower of the Guardians of the Free Republics. "It's going to be really good. There's going to be funds enough for everybody."
    washingtonpost.com

    The letters from the group, Guardians of the Free Republics, do not threaten violence, according to officials in Richmond and Washington. No arrests have been made.
    As I said, much ado about nothing. But don't let that stop you from trying to broad-brush tea partiers or right-wingers as violent anti-government extremists.
  18. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    And I notice he didn't take a moment to apologize for unintentionally spitting on another human.

    Were you so concerned about the guy that apologize as well?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  19. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #59  
    toledoblade.com -- The Blade ~ Toledo Ohio

    Most of the indicted militia members accused of being anti-government extremists have active voting records, a check with area voter registration offices showed yesterday.

    One is a registered Democrat, and the party affiliations of the rest could not be determined.
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions